


Report

by Utopiacityneverland



Category: Karroy
Genre: Other
Language: English
Status: Completed
Published: 2019-04-10
Updated: 2019-04-10
Packaged: 2020-01-11 02:49:38
Rating: Explicit
Warnings: Rape/Non-Con
Chapters: 1
Words: 2,693
Publisher: archiveofourown.org
Story URL: https://archiveofourown.org/works/18421272
Author URL: https://archiveofourown.org/users/Utopiacityneverland/pseuds/Utopiacityneverland





	Report

Sexual Abuse in campus Report by UtopiacityNeverland  
April 10, 2019

 

Abstract

Sexual abuse in children is a problem of epidemic proportions, affecting children of all ages, socioeconomic levels, and cultural backgrounds. Approximately 1% of children experience some form of sexual abuse each year, resulting in victimization of girls of 12–25% and 8–10% of children younger than 18 years. Of the 3 million cases of maltreatment of children, approximately 20% are reported as abuse sexual . In Milan, in 2002, with approximately 1.3 million inhabitants, 634 cases were reported, including 110 in children up to 14 years.

 

儿童性虐待是流行病的一个问题，影响到所有年龄，社会经济水平和文化背景的儿童。每年约有1％的儿童遭受某种形式的性虐待，导致12-25％的女孩受害，18岁以下的儿童受害8-10％。在300万虐待儿童案件中，约有20％被报告为虐待性行为。在米兰，2002年，有大约130万居民，报告了634例，其中110例为14岁以下的儿童。

 

 

让我们来看看儿童在性侵中遭受了什么

 

===

 

研究

这是一项针对12岁以下儿童的回顾性、横向和流行病学研究，这些儿童在2008年至2009年期间曾在巴西巴西利亚的法医学研究所(IML-DF)学习，并被怀疑有性虐待行为。

 

结果

在此期间，3607名疑似性虐待者和1762名(48.8%)12岁以下儿童接受了IML-DF治疗。其中男生238人(13.5%)，女生1524人(86.5%)。在这些男孩中，平均年龄为6.5岁，9.6%的男孩被发现有与性虐待相一致的伤害。在这些案例中，有43.4%的人知道行凶者是谁。主要病变为肛裂、裂口、瘀伤和肛门扩张。在20例(8.4%)中，事实与检查之间的时间间隔排除了任何结论。接受IML-DF检查的女孩(1524例)接受两种类型的检查:性欲行为(773例至50.7%)和强奸(751例至49.3%)。在性欲行为的测试中，5.3%的人有熟人实施性虐待的迹象(68.2%)，3.0%的人由于测试与事实之间的时间间隔太长而无法确定。在强奸案件的调查中，只有2.1%的调查对象有与虐待相一致的损害。在1524例患者中，57例进行精子检测，5例(8.7%)阳性。女童遭受性虐待的平均年龄(10.7岁)高于男童(6.5岁)。

性虐待的定义是指儿童不能理解、不能同意或违反法律的任何性行为。性行为可能包括爱抚、口交、强奸、插入生殖器或肛门、暴露癖、窥阴癖和接触色情作品。人们认为，成年人和儿童之间的任何性接触都被认为是虐待，因为12岁的儿童不应该参与任何性活动。

 

Methodology

This is a retrospective, transversal, and epidemiological study on children younger than 12 years, who attended the Institute of Forensic Medicine of DF (IML-DF), Brasilia, Brazil, with suspicion of sexual abuse between 2008 and 2009.

 

Results

During this period, 3607 persons with suspected sexual abuse and 1762 (48.8%) children younger than 12 years were treated in IML-DF. Of this total, 238 (13.5%) were boys, and 1524 (86.5%) were girls. Among the boys, the average age was 6.5 years, and 9.6% were found to have injuries consistent with sexual abuse. In 43.4% of these cases, the perpetrator was known. The main lesions found were anal fissures and lacerations, bruises, and anal dilatation. In 20 cases (8.4%), the time interval between fact and examination precluded any conclusion. The girls (1524 cases) referred to the IML-DF were subjected to two types of tests: libidinous acts (773 to 50.7%) and rape (751 to 49.3%). In tests of libidinous acts, 5.3% had signs of sexual abuse perpetrated by acquaintances (68.2%), and 3.0% were inconclusive because of the long time lag between the examination and fact. In survey of rape cases, only 2.1% of subjects examined had lesions consistent with abuse. In 57 of 1524 cases, specimens were sampled for sperm test, and five cases (8.7%) showed positive results. The average age of girls being sexually abused (10.7 years) was higher than that for boys (6.5 years).

 

Sexual abuse is defined as any sexual activity that the child cannot understand or give consent or that violates the law. Sexual activity may include fondling, oral-genital contact, rape, penetration genital or anal, exhibitionism, voyeurism, and exposure to pornography [10], [11]. It is considered that any sexual contact between an adult and a child is considered abuse because children aged 12 years should not be involved in any sexual activity.

 

(reference：Modelli, Manoel E.S. ; Galvão, Malthus Fonseca ; Pratesi, Riccardo  
Forensic Science International, 10 April 2012, Vol.217(1-3), pp.1-4)

 

 

===

 

他们需要的是什么

 

10项研究报告了CSA披露障碍的调查结果。孟多萨(Mont 'Ros-Mendoza & Hecht, 1989)并没有阐明关于障碍的发现，而是将重点放在报告的披露推动者上。

Mont’Ros-Mendoza & Hecht, 1989) did not articulate findings about barriers but focused on the reported facilitators for disclosure instead.

 

研究发现，儿童和青少年害怕父母的制裁(McElvaney, Greene， & Hogan, 2014; Schonbucher et al.， 2012)，失去家庭支持，社会耻辱，破坏他们的声誉，侵犯家庭荣誉和被杀害(Shalhoub-Kevorkian, 2005)。儿童也害怕对嫌疑犯(如入狱)及其家庭(如家庭破裂)产生负面影响(Crisma et al.， 2004; Jensen et al.， 2005; McElvaney et al.， 2014; Munzer et al.， 2016; Schaeffer et al.， 2011; Schonbucher et al.， 2012)。可能关系和家庭动力学等涉嫌行凶者和受害者之间的关系(Schaeffer et al ., 2011)以及受害者对涉嫌犯罪的思想和情感参与一个孩子是否由于害怕负面影响在选择披露。的确，儿童对(Kellogg and Huston, 1995, Munzer et al.， 2016)的爱和对保护的需要(Crisma et al.， 2004, Schonbucher et al.， 2012)被发现是受害者披露性虐待经历的潜在障碍。这可能部分解释了为什么以前的研究已经确定，家庭内虐待的受害者比家庭外虐待的受害者更有可能延迟披露(Arata, 1998; Goodman- brown, Edelstein, Goodman, Jones， & Gordon, 2003; Hershkowitz, Lamb, Horowitz, 2007; Hershkowitz, lane, Lamb, 2007; London et al.， 2008, Smith et al.， 2000)。可能是因为现有的研究将披露视为一个单向的过程，忽略了披露发生的潜在的进化、关系和互动背景(Reitsema & Grietens, 2016)。的确，正如Flam和Haugstvedt(2013)所描述的，“孩子们不会在真空中讲述、拖延、撤回或重申他们遭受性侵害的经历”(第634页)。

 

六项研究表明，孩子对虐待的情感反应(内疚、羞愧、自责和对施暴者行为的责任)是信息披露的重要障碍。定量研究发现，如果孩子感到内疚和羞愧，他们明显更有可能推迟披露(Munzer et al.， 2016, Schonbucher et al.， 2012)。凯洛格和休斯顿(1995)发现，拖延披露的孩子更有可能相信虐待是他们的错，而不是作恶者的错。在McElvaney等人(2014)的定性研究中，这种责任感以及自责和羞愧感也被认为是信息披露的障碍。这些发现似乎与强调羞耻和内疚等构形在CSA中的作用的心理学研究和理论相吻合(Browne & Finkelhor, 1986; Romero, Wyatt, Loeb, Carmona， & Solis, 1999; Ullman, 2002)。

 

Studies found that children and adolescents feared negative consequences for themselves such as parental sanctions (McElvaney, Greene, & Hogan, 2014; Schönbucher et al., 2012), losing familial support, social-shame, ruining their reputation, violating the family honor and being killed (Shalhoub-Kevorkian, 2005). Children also feared negative consequences for the suspected offender (e.g. imprisonment) and for their family (e.g. family break-up) (Crisma et al., 2004; Jensen et al., 2005; McElvaney et al., 2014; Münzer et al., 2016; Schaeffer et al., 2011; Schönbucher et al., 2012). It is possible that relational and family dynamics such as the relationship between the alleged perpetrator and the victim (Schaeffer et al., 2011) as well as the victim’s thoughts and feelings towards the suspected offender play a part in whether a child is impeded by a fear of negative consequences when choosing to disclose. Indeed, the child’s love for (Kellogg and Huston, 1995, Münzer et al., 2016) and the need to protect (Crisma et al., 2004, Schönbucher et al., 2012) the alleged perpetrator were found as potential barriers to victims disclosing their experiences of sexual abuse. This may partially explain why previous research has identified that victims of intra-familial abuse are more likely to delay disclosure than victims of extra-familial abuse (Arata, 1998; Goodman-Brown, Edelstein, Goodman, Jones, & Gordon, 2003; Hershkowitz, Lamb, Horowitz, 2007; Hershkowitz, Lanes, Lamb, 2007; London et al., 2008, Smith et al., 2000). It may be that extant research views disclosure as a unidirectional process, ignoring the potential evolving, relational and interactional context within which disclosures occur (Reitsema & Grietens, 2016). Indeed, as Flåm and Haugstvedt (2013) describe, “children do not tell, delay, recant or reaffirm accounts of their sexual victimization in a vacuum” (p. 634).

 

Six studies identified the child’s emotional response to the abuse (guilt, shame, self-blame and responsibility for the perpetrator’s actions) as important barriers to disclosure. Quantitative studies found children were significantly more likely to delay disclosing if they experienced feelings of guilt and shame (Münzer et al., 2016, Schönbucher et al., 2012). Kellogg and Huston (1995) found that children who delayed disclosure were significantly more likely to believe that the abuse was their fault as much as it was the perpetrators’. This felt sense of responsibilityalong with feelings of self-blame and shame were also identified as barriers to disclosure in McElvaney et al.’s (2014) qualitative study. These findings appear to fit with psychological research and theory highlighting the role of constructs such as shame and guilt in CSA (Browne & Finkelhor, 1986; Romero, Wyatt, Loeb, Carmona, & Solis, 1999; Ullman, 2002).

 

 

===

 

研究的意义：

1.我们鼓励受害者揭露自己的经历  
第一，他们的伤痛需要被关照  
第二，不给加害者放纵的机会

 

2.我们保护受害者在披露后不受伤害

 

===

 

家庭与社会的态度

目前的审查认识到儿童揭露家庭内部虐待的风险。研究表明，这种性质的虐待可能导致儿童和青少年受害者的信息披露延迟，甚至不披露。需要制定协议，确保那些接受披露的人知道如何作出反应，以便尽量减少对儿童在家庭中地位的感知和实际损害。也就是说，管理这些信息披露的复杂性和敏感性需要进一步的思考和研究。

 

The current review recognizes the risk for children disclosing intra-familial abuse. Research has demonstrated that abuse of this nature may result in disclosure latency and even non-disclosure in child and adolescent victims. Protocols need to be established that ensure those receiving disclosures know how to respond and react in order to minimize the perceived and actual harm to the child’s position within the family. That said the complexity and sensitivity of managing these disclosures warrant further thought and research.

 

(reference：Forensic Science International  
Volume 217, Issues 1–3, 10 April 2012, Pages 1-4)

 

 

===

 

希望大家思考以下几个问题（我会抽时把这篇report补全）

 

我们希望我们的社会是什么样的  
因此我们应该怎样对待受害者  
不仅仅是性侵

 

让我们来看看多元化世界中的受害现象  
1.妇女歧视  
2.种族歧视

 

在某种规则下，我们每个人都有成为强者或者弱者的时刻，在我们身为强者时，我们应该尽可能帮助那些需要帮助的人。因为在我们身为弱者时，我们一定期待着，有人可以如同阳光一般走进我们灰暗的生命，点亮我们温热的太阳。

 

同时我们谈谈爱。  
爱一个人是因为他美好，还是因为爱他所以他怎样都是美好的，值得被爱的？

 

希望你历经风霜后依然被视为珍宝地宠爱。并不是因为你如同生来一样未经世事招惹的天真，而是无论你经历了什么，有人都能深深爱着你纯洁无暇的灵魂。


End file.
